[docs] [issue15097] Improving wording on the thread-safeness of import

[Martin v. Löwis]

Martin v. Löwis <martin at v.loewis.de> added the comment:

> which, I think, fails to make the main point:

I disagree. It currently makes it main point, but stops doing so
under your rephrasing. The main point of that section is

"While the import machinery is thread-safe, there are two key
restrictions on threaded imports due to inherent limitations in the way
that thread-safety is provided:"

The existence of an import lock is deliberately omitted from the text,
and the reader is supposed to abide by the restriction as written
regardless of the motivation behind it.

> Adding example code and/or a flow diagram might be a bit too much,
> but it does clarify how easy it is to make this mistake. See the
> attached for an example (both a simple example script, as well as a
> flow diagram explaining what happens).

The entire notion of an import lock is obsolete. Python 3.3 does not
have that anymore.

----------
nosy: +loewis

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue15097>
_______________________________________